LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
⚖️ Ask the AI about your situation:🚗 Car Accident💼 Work / Job🏠 Housing / Eviction👪 Family / Divorce📋 Contract Dispute💰 Money Owed

K.K. SURESH & ANR. ETC. versus FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC.

Citation: [2018] 9 S.C.R. 905 · Decided: 20-08-2018 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE · Disposal: Dismissed

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
905
K.K. SURESH & ANR. ETC.
v.
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC.
(Civil Appeal Nos. 10502-10505 of  2011)
AUGUST 20, 2018
[ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE AND
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, JJ.]
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: Regularization – Claim for
regularization by the appellants working as clerical staff – Plea of
respondent-employer that appellants were not employees nor they
were ever appointed by respondent in their set up but they were
appointed as clerical staff by one cooperative society and therefore
in the absence of any kind of relationship of the employer and
employee between the appellants and the respondent, a relief of
either absorption or regularization in the services of the respondent
does not arise – Held: The facts involved in the case at hand clearly
proved that there did not exist any kind of employee-employer
relationship between the appellants and the respondent – Thus, the
appellants not granted relief claimed.
Dismissing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1. The appellants failed to adduce any evidence to
prove existence of any relationship between them and the
respondent; Second, when the documents on record showed that
the appellants were appointed by the Head Load Workers Co-
operative Society but not by the respondent then obviously the
remedy of the appellants, if at all, in relation to their any service
dispute was against the said Society being their employer but not
against the respondent;  Third, the respondent was able to prove
with the aid of evidence that the appellants were in the
employment of the said Society whereas the appellants were not
able to prove with the aid of any documents that they were
appointed by the respondent and how and on what basis they
claimed to be in the employment of the respondent except to
make an averment in the writ petitions in that behalf. It was not
sufficient to grant any relief to the appellants. [Para 8] [907-G-H;
908-A-B]
905
[2018] 9 S.C.R. 905
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
906
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 9 S.C.R.
2. So far as the reference made by the appellants to one
litigation decided by the Industrial Tribunal between one set of
persons and the respondent regarding the status of such persons
is concerned, it has no relevance for deciding this case and nor
it, in any way, helps the appellants for claiming relief against the
respondent. It is for the simple reasons that first, the case at
hand arose out of the writ petitions whereas the case relied on
arose out of industrial reference decided by the Industrial
Tribunal; Second, the facts involved in the case at hand clearly
prove that there did not exist any kind of employee and employer
relationship between the appellants and the respondent; and
lastly, there is no parity of any nature noticed on facts in the case
at hand and the case relied on by the appellants. [Paras 9 and 10]
[908-C-E]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 10502-
10505 of 2011.
From the Judgment and Order dated 28.06.2007 and 23.08.2007
of the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in Writ Appeal Nos. 479 of
2002 and 480 of 2002 and  in  R.P. Nos. 767 of 2007 and 768 of 2007
respectively]
C. U. Singh, S. R. Singh, Brijender Chahar, Sr. Advs., Y.
Prabhakara Rao, J. P. Mishra, P. V. Dinesh, R. R. Kumar, Atulesh Kumar,
Swetank Shantanu, Vishwa Pal Singh, Dr. Pooja Jha, Ronak Karanpuria,
Sumit Sharma, Nagendra Singh, R. Prakash, Ms. Nandita Jha, Ajit
Pudussery, K. Vijayan, Ajeet Singh Verma, C. Paramasivam, Rakesh
K. Sharma, V. K. Sidharthan, Ms. Sridevi V. S., Sudarsh Menon, Bharat
Sangal, Ms. Malini Poduval, Advs. with them for the appearing parties.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, J.  1. These appeals are directed
against the final judgment and order dated 28.06.2007 passed by the
High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in Writ Appeal No.479 of 2002 and
Writ Appeal No.480 of 2002 whereby the High Court, by a common
judgment, dismissed the appeals filed by the appellants herein.  Against
the said order, the appellants filed review petitions which were disposed
of by the High Court by order dated 23.08.2007 in R.P. No.767 of 2007
in Writ Appeal No.479 of 2002 and R.P. No.768 of 2007 in Writ Appeal
No.480 of 2002.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
907
2. In order to appreciate the short controversy involved in these
appeals, few relevant facts need to be mentioned infra.
3. The appellants claiming to be working as clerical staff filed
writ petitions against the Food Corporation of India-FCI(Respondent
No. 1 herein) in the Ke

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.